Nearly 20 colleges and universities were cited and many eventually changed their mascots, though some not without considerable consternation. Others, such as the Florida State Seminoles, received waivers after getting approval from local tribes.

Some schools around the country simply changed team nicknames on their own, reflecting a shift in societal attitudes.

San Diego State, whose Aztec nickname dates back to the 1920s, escaped the list because the NCAA could not find any organized tribe or group related to the Aztecs, a civilization that dates to at least the 12th century, the Union-Tribune reported in 2005.

That the Aztec civilization was pretty much wiped out by the Spaniards in the 1500s might have had something to do with that.

Stephen Weber, SDSU’s president at the time, addressed the matter in a letter to the NCAA.

"As I mentioned in my letter of January 3, 2003, the Aztecs are not a Native American or American Indian culture," Weber wrote. "However, the Aztecs are central to the cultural heritage of Mexico."

So the Aztec Warrior got off on a technicality. If the question is whether it’s appropriate to depict warriors from indigenous peoples, SDSU’s should have been on the list.

San Diego State has faced internal and external pressure to do away with the Aztec nickname for decades and we’re in the middle of the latest go-round. Interim President Sally Roush is creating a task force to weigh in on the matter, and she will make a determination by the end of May, before a new president is expected to take office.

It’s probably not something Roush or other SDSU powers want to leave as the first order of business for her replacement.

This follows a November advisory vote to get rid of the Aztec mascot and moniker by the University Senate, which consists of professors, lecturers, a coach, staff members, students, the provost, a dean, administrators and others.

Such efforts are usually emotional, controversial and costly. Arguably, the most intense battle in the country was over the decision at the University of North Dakota to drop the nickname and imagery of the Fighting Sioux.

About 20 years ago, a former North Dakota hockey player who struck it rich in the casino business threatened to withdraw a $100 million donation to build a new hockey arena for the school if the nickname was changed. The arena was already under construction and the Fighting Sioux remained, for a while.

UND later went to court to fight the 2005 NCAA edict, but eventually reached a settlement, agreeing to seek consent from Sioux tribes in the state. One refused. The state’s higher education board proceeded with the name change, but the legislature voted to retain it.

A statewide referendum was held in 2012 and voters agreed the Fighting Sioux should go. Other legal challenges ran their course and the University of North Dakota teams are now called the Fighting Hawks. Many local hockey fans, in particular, are said to be the most upset about it and are known to boo the mention of the name. Some continue to wear Fighting Sioux jerseys.

As SDSU moves forward, the school will survey its alumni. Some already have made clear they support keeping the Aztec name and at least a few have suggested their ongoing donations to the school may end if it’s changed. For many, “Aztec for Life” is more than just a slogan.

There’s probably never a good time for a mascot-change controversy, but this is an especially sensitive moment for San Diego State. The university and its supporters are moving ahead with a November ballot measure to create a SDSU West campus with a new football stadium at the old Qualcomm Stadium site in Mission Valley.

That will be a pitched battle competing with another ballot measure for a different project on the same site — the SoccerCity stadium, commercial and housing development.

Alienating any alumni, particularly influential ones, does not help that cause for SDSU.

This is not an easy situation. I’ve had some experience with mascot disputes, albeit from a distance. Two of my alma maters went through nickname changes, though I wasn’t around for either.

You hear that kind of defense for existing warrior mascots to this day, including for the Aztec Warrior. By 1972, local Native Americans started calling for a change and the teams became known as the UMass Minutemen. (Minutewomen were added later.)

Around that time, I was playing hockey as a Wellesley High School Red Raider in Massachusetts. Years after I left, the nickname was changed to simply the Raiders. The logo is a pirate, the kind usually identified with pillaging coastal towns. Given the professional path taken by some of my schoolmates, “Corporate Raiders” might have been more accurate.

As a white guy raised in the suburbs, I lack direct Native American sensitivities to these issues. Regardless, I can draw a distinction between the Atlanta Braves, which seems an honorable title, and the Washington Redskins, which falls into the must-change Redmen category.

My two cents: The current Aztec Warrior seems more like the former than the latter.

There are a lot of moving parts involved in the SDSU dispute, and not just the coming presidential change and push for a campus expansion.

The leader of this latest move to ban the Aztec has himself become an issue. American Indian Studies lecturer Ozzie Monge is under investigation by the state attorney general after being accused of making disparaging remarks about whites, blacks and even Native Americans. He is not teaching at SDSU this semester.

That aside, there’s rich irony in one of his arguments for getting rid of the mascot. In addition to contending the Aztec Warrior is a racist symbol, Monge said it’s a historically inaccurate character and shouldn’t be representing SDSU because the Aztecs lived deep in Mexico, 1,000 miles away.